I accepted Cindy Graves’ invite to co-host Thursday’s edition of Politics, Business and Mayhem on WBOB 600 AM talk radio. Alexander Pantinakis, the show’s producer, was the host, and I have to say I always have fun with Cindy or Alex in the driver’s seat.

We talked a lot about gun control, especially with the politicization of the tragedy in Connecticut. Media and neoliberals once again seized a crisis in hopes of furthering a political agenda.

I referred to the FBI crime stats for 2011—Murder Circumstances by Weapon. Most murders involving firearms involve a handgun. Of 12, 664 murders, 8,583 involved firearms. Knives or cutting instruments were used in 1,694 murders. Fists, feet or other “personal weapons” were used in 726 murders.

If the U.S. banned firearms, would lives be saved? China has banned firearms for most purposes, other than hunting. ABC News reported this in 2010:

[A] man slashed 28 children, two teachers and a security guard in a kindergarten in eastern China.

So do we ban knives?

If we talk about the tragedy in Connecticut, we have to ask ourselves why young men like Adam Lanza and Jared Loughner targeted strangers. What made these young men have so little respect for human life? Lanza took his own life; Loughner spared himself. Why haven’t media delved into the lives of these men and informed the public? Furthermore, why do parents tolerate obviously unstable children having access to guns?

If gun control prevents such crimes, how did the Ft. Hood killings happen? Soldiers who were shot weren’t carrying a weapon. The Army major who did those shootings did so for political reasons, committing a hate crime in the truest sense of the word. Meanwhile the government classified those shootings as workplace violence, a gesture of complete disrespect for the innocent dead and wounded. The U.S. Dept. of Justice refused to call a terrorist a terrorist.

Many of us have grown up around guns and have been taught respect for any weapon that can harm another human being. When a person commits mass murder, he obviously hasn’t been taught that lesson.

Meanwhile, neoliberal hypocrites like Michael Moore blame everyone but the shooter for the crime. Moore certainly enjoys the benefit of an armed bodyguard. Like other neolibs, Moore doesn’t want you to have the same privileges and rights he enjoys.

The Connecticut tragedy isn’t about guns. It’s about a young man so full of rage he shot his mother multiple times before killing innocents. Had he not had a gun, he had the resources to come up with other types of weapons. The guns were a means to his ends, but they weren’t the only means he had available.

Chicago, a city whose name symbolizes corruption and decadence, has traditionally attempted to regulate guns very aggressively. Mayor Rahm Emanuel hasn’t said too much about the more than 400 school age children who were wounded in firearm incidents in 2012 despite regulations.

Reader Comments (2)

The government is so anti gun and saying they are trying to help the victims of violent crimes involving guns. Why doesn't someone put them on the spot and say show us? Put all these millions of tax money you have just received from firearms, ammunition and gun related items to the families. Make it extreme public knowledge as to how much money they're getting and acting like all of us gun owners are the bad ones. If they want to help victims where's the proof? They're not willing to give, just receive.